Flattery meets its limits as Trump turns on Starmer

Keir Starmer’s approach to Donald Trump was never subtle: lean into diplomacy, avoid confrontation, and, when necessary, flatter. When the British prime minister sat beside Trump in the Oval Office earlier this year, praising a royal invitation as “truly historic,” it was a calculated move — part of a broader strategy to keep Washington onside.

For a while, it seemed to work. But the relationship has shifted sharply in recent weeks, exposing the limits of that approach.

Trump has increasingly singled out Starmer for criticism as allies hesitate to fully support the US-Israeli war on Iran. His remarks have been unusually pointed, dismissing the British leader as lacking the stature of Winston Churchill and questioning the UK’s reliability as an ally.

The turning point came when Britain declined to allow its military bases to be used in the early stages of the conflict — a decision Starmer reportedly saw as grounded in legal concerns. Although the UK later contributed to defensive operations after its own assets in the region were targeted, that partial support did little to ease tensions.

Since then, Trump has alternated between criticism and mockery. He publicly rebuked Britain for hesitating to commit further military resources, including naval support in the Strait of Hormuz, framing the response as indecisive and inadequate.

Behind the scenes, the strain is beginning to ripple outward. In London, officials are now quietly reassessing plans for a potential state visit by King Charles III to Washington. What was initially envisioned as a symbolic show of transatlantic unity is now seen as carrying political risk.

“The last thing that we want to do is have His Majesty… embarrassed,” said Labour MP Emily Thornberry, suggesting the visit might need to be reconsidered.

That hesitation reflects a broader concern: Trump’s unpredictability. Even careful diplomacy offers no guarantee of stability in the relationship. As former UK ambassador to Washington Peter Westmacott put it, Starmer’s strategy of restraint and private negotiation “doesn’t always work, and you never know what he will say the next day.”

At the same time, cancelling or delaying the visit carries its own risks. British officials must balance the potential embarrassment of a volatile encounter with the diplomatic fallout of appearing to snub the US president.

Domestically, the political landscape is shifting as well. Initial calls from some UK politicians to support the US militarily have softened, reflecting growing public skepticism about the war. Figures like Nigel Farage and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch have both recalibrated their positions, with Badenoch even criticising Trump’s rhetoric as “childish” and “unseemly.”

For Starmer, the moment is a test of a strategy built on careful management rather than confrontation. The assumption was that steady diplomacy could navigate Trump’s second presidency. What’s becoming clearer now is that this approach has limits — especially when the other side sets the tone.